Election Disadvantage
Job Creation – Key to Election
Download 1.8 Mb.
|
Job Creation – Key to ElectionObama will use transportation spending to campaign on jobs --- key to his reelection.Johnson, 2/17/2012 (Fawn – correspondent for the National Journal, Infrastructure Becomes Campaign Fodder, Transportation Experts Blog at the National Journal, p. http://transportation.nationaljournal.com/2012/02/infrastructure-becomes-campaig.php) If you want proof that President Obama is distancing himself as far from Congress as he can, look no further than his proposed infrastructure budget. The White House proposed $476 billion over six years for surface transportation in the fiscal 2013 budget, which is at least $200 billion more than House Republicans are proposing. It's also at least $150 billion more than current infrastructure spending levels. Obama is aiming high, even though he knows he'll probably get much less. Infrastructure means jobs, and "jobs" are the name of the game for his reelection. It's an added bonus that infrastructure has been in the news, which gives politicians of all stripes the opportunity to exploit it for reelection purposes. Both the House and the Senate are attempting (and so far not succeeding) to pass surface transportation bills. Obama ideally wants to increase federal infrastructure investment, but he has also praised the Senate for its more modest bill that simply maintains the current spending levels over two years. Leaders say it could take a few weeks to get that measure completed. Generic – Investment SupportThe public supports transportation investment --- includes independents.The Rockefeller Foundation 2011 (The Rockefeller Foundation Infrastructure Survey, Conducted by Hart Research Associates and Public Opinion Strategies, p. 3) In fact, voters are in strong agreement with President Obama’s ideas on investment in transportation. Survey respondents were read excerpts from the president’s State of the Union address related to transportation and asked their reaction. “The American Dream has required each generation to sacrifice and meet the demands of a new age. We know what it takes to compete for the jobs and industries of our time. We need the fastest, most reliable ways to move people, goods, and information—from high-speed rail to high-speed Internet. So over the last two years, we've begun rebuilding for the 21st century, a project that has meant thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry. We should redouble those efforts. We'll put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges. We'll make sure this is fully paid for, attract private investment, and pick projects based on what's best for the economy, not what's best for politicians.” • Fully 80% of voters agree with this statement, including 46% who strongly agree, while 19% say they disagree. • Agreement is nearly unanimous among Democrats (95%) and is exceptionally high among independents (75%) and Republicans (66%). • Indeed, 91% agree with the specific idea that “our generation has a responsibility to the future to invest in America's infrastructure--just as our parents and grandparents did”; only 8% disagree with this. The public wants transportation spending even if it results in more taxes.Madland and Bunker. 3/22/2012 (David – Director of the American Worker Project at American Progress, and Nick – Research Assistant with the Economic Policy team at the Center for American Progress, Ties that Bind: How a Strong Middle Class Supports Strong Public Infrastructure, p. http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2012/03/middle_class_infrastructure.html/print.html) And make no mistake, the broader American public supports increased investments in infrastructure. Ninety-three percent feel making improvements to infrastructure is important; 72 percent support “increasing federal spending to build and repair roads, bridges, and schools”; and 81 percent are prepared to pay more in taxes to do so. Generic – Investment Support Polls show overwhelming public support for infrastructure investment across all party lines.Building America’s Future, 1/8/2009 (Poll: Majority of Americans Ready to Pay for Better Infrastructure but Demand Accountability, p. http://www.bafuture.org/news/press-release/poll-majority-americans-ready-pay-better-infrastructure-demand-accountability) Today the co‐chairs of Building America’s Future announced the results of a national poll that examines American views on infrastructure, priorities and willingness to pay for it. Conducted by Luntz, Maslansky Strategic Research, the poll shows widespread and bipartisan support for smartinfrastructure investment with accountability measures. Key findings included: • A near unanimous 94% of Americans are concerned about our nation’s infrastructure. • 81% of Americans are prepared to pay 1% more in taxes to rebuild America’s infrastructure. • Accountability is their single highest priority (61%) in rebuilding America’s infrastructure. o Regarding infrastructure spending, Americans care most that projects are on time andon budget (31%), and that they can see exactly where the money is being spent (24%). • Americans understand that infrastructure isn’t just roads and highways. Indeed, energyfacilities are their highest priority. Roads and highways score second, clean water is third. “Americans don’t want their children educated in portable classrooms, and they don’t want to waste millions of gallons of water from leaky old pipes,” said California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. “They want the federal government to smartly invest in our nation’s infrastructure. Now is the perfecttime to put money into public‐works projects because it will help create jobs while pumping up our economy. It's like hitting two homeruns with one swing. This poll confirms that infrastructure is a priority to all Americans, and that they are willing to invest in their own quality of life.” “This poll confirms what many of us believe – the American public understands the importance of investing in a broad range of infrastructure, from the energy grid to roads and transit to clean water. And they understand why infrastructure is so important to them in their daily lives,” said PennsylvaniaGovernor Ed Rendell. “But the public is demanding strong accountability, transparency and oversight of any new investments in infrastructure,” Rendell said. “They want us to set national priorities in infrastructure investment that improve people’s lives, their communities and our economy. They would rather see us take the time to pick the right investments, rather than rush ahead with the same old projects.” "The numbers don't lie: a majority of Americans want to invest in building up our nation's infrastructure, but they want to know that their money is being spent wisely,” said New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. “They want the government to clean up its act and take responsibility for both success and failure. Any investment made must have benchmarks attached so that we can evaluate what is getting done and what opportunities are being squandered.” “There simply isn't another issue with such widespread support across partisan lines and geographic boundaries,” said Frank Luntz of Luntz, Maslansky Strategic Research. “The public already sees the need and is ready to lend a hand financially to make sure it gets done – but they want it done correctly. This is a major test for government. Accountability is absolutely essential." The public supports transportation spending.Pew Research Center, 3/2/2010 (Support for Alternative Energy and Offshore Drilling, p. http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1509/alternative-energy-offshore-oil-drilling-nuclear-cap-and-trade) The public continues to favor a wide range of government policies to address the nation's energy supply. More than three-quarters of the public (78%) favors increasing federal funding for research on wind, solar and hydrogen technology. A large majority (70%) also favors spending more on subway, rail and bus systems. Both measures are little changed from recent years. Generic – Investment Support Public supports transportation infrastructure.PRWeb’ 12 (May 18, 2012, “Americans Value Highways and Bridges as a National Treasure” http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/5/prweb9521021.htm) A new survey from HNTB Corporation finds two-thirds (66 percent) of Americans who intend to vote during this year's presidential election feel that a candidate's standing on American transportation infrastructure will influence their decision; more than one in five (22 percent) say this will be extremely influential on who they vote for.¶ "Our highways, bridges and other transportation infrastructure are essential assets that support growth and investment in the U.S. economy," said Pete Rahn, HNTB leader national transportation practice. "People expect them to be resilient, reliable and safe."¶ Clearly, Americans hold the nation's infrastructure in high regard. Nearly nine in ten (89 percent) Americans feel it’s important for the federal government to fund the maintenance and improvements of interstate highways.¶ Yet, this infrastructure isn’t receiving the fiscal attention it deserves. Congress recently approved the ninth extension of transportation legislation that originally expired in 2009. The Highway Trust Fund – due to inflation, rising construction costs and increasingly fuel efficient vehicles – no longer collects enough money to support the U.S. surface transportation system, remaining solvent only through a series of infusions from federal general revenue funds.¶ More than half of Americans (57 percent) believe the nation’s infrastructure is underfunded.¶ The uncertainty over a long-term bill also is a challenge for state departments of transportation, which rely heavily on federal funding to support major highway and bridge programs, and creates ambiguity for planners and contractors who need the certainty of a long-term bill to commit to large, complex multiyear projects.¶ "The absence of a long-term bill is hurting our economic competitiveness," said Rahn. "Recent efforts by the House and Senate to move discussions into a conference committee and hammer out potential details of a bill are a step in the right direction, but what’s really needed is a stable, long-term authorization that can adequately pay for our transportation system."¶ Overall, 4 in 5 (80 percent) Americans would rather increase funding and improve roads and bridges than continue current funding levels and risk allowing our roads and bridges deteriorate.¶ The challenge is finding sustainable and sufficient revenue sources. More than 3 in 5 (61 percent) Americans would prefer to allocate funds for these projects through tolls. Generic – HNTB Survey ProdictHNTB survey has a low margin of error and is reliablePRWeb’ 12 (May 18, 2012, “Americans Value Highways and Bridges as a National Treasure” http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/5/prweb9521021.htm) About the survey HNTB’s America THINKS national highway survey polled a random nationwide sample of 1,024 Americans April 2-10, 2012. It was conducted by Kelton Research, which used an e-mail invitation and online survey. Quotas were set to ensure reliable and accurate representation of the total U.S. population ages 18 and over. The margin of error is +/- 3.1 percent. Generic – Swings VotersTransportation spending will swing voters in the election --- they want more funding.ADS Logistics, 5/29/2012 (Transportation Infrastructure Weights Heavy on the Minds of Voters, ADS Logistics Supply Chain Management Blog, p. http://www.adslogistics.com/blog/bid/78595/Transportation-Infrastructure-Weighs-Heavy-on-the-Minds-of-Voters) With all the political issues you will be hearing about as the election nears, one important topic that will be on many Americans’ minds may surprise you. The transportation infrastructure concerns many in this country, and it will be heavily considered before voters decide who they want for the next president. In fact, according to Truckinginfo, about two thirds of American voters claim that each candidate’s stance on transportation infrastructure will help them vote. This is not exactly a hot button issue that you may see discussed on the news frequently, but it is clearly important to the average voter. The survey, which was conducted by HNTB Corp., also discovered the following results: 89% of citizens surveyed feel that federal funding is crucial to improve interstate highways. More than 80% wish to increase current funding for highways. 57% claimed that this country’s infrastructure is underfunded. Transportation spending is an issue that will heavily influence likely voters.Houston Chronicle, 5/18/2012 (Americans Value Highways and Bridges as a National Treasure, p. http://www.chron.com/business/press-releases/article/Americans-Value-Highways-and-Bridges-as-a-3568488.php%20accessed%20tm%205/19) A new survey from HNTB Corporation finds two-thirds (66 percent) of Americans who intend to vote during this year's presidential election feel that a candidate's standing on American transportation infrastructure will influence their decision; more than one in five (22 percent) say this will be extremely influential on who they vote for. "Our highways, bridges and other transportation infrastructure are essential assets that support growth and investment in the U.S. economy," said Pete Rahn, HNTB leader national transportation practice. "People expect them to be resilient, reliable and safe." Clearly, Americans hold the nation's infrastructure in high regard. Nearly nine in ten (89 percent) Americans feel it’s important for the federal government to fund the maintenance and improvements of interstate highways. Yet, this infrastructure isn’t receiving the fiscal attention it deserves. Congress recently approved the ninth extension of transportation legislation that originally expired in 2009. The Highway Trust Fund – due to inflation, rising construction costs and increasingly fuel efficient vehicles – no longer collects enough money to support the U.S. surface transportation system, remaining solvent only through a series of infusions from federal general revenue funds. More than half of Americans (57 percent) believe the nation’s infrastructure is underfunded. The uncertainty over a long-term bill also is a challenge for state departments of transportation, which rely heavily on federal funding to support major highway and bridge programs, and creates ambiguity for planners and contractors who need the certainty of a long-term bill to commit to large, complex multiyear projects. "The absence of a long-term bill is hurting our economic competitiveness," said Rahn. "Recent efforts by the House and Senate to move discussions into a conference committee and hammer out potential details of a bill are a step in the right direction, but what’s really needed is a stable, long-term authorization that can adequately pay for our transportation system." Overall, 4 in 5 (80 percent) Americans would rather increase funding and improve roads and bridges than continue current funding levels and risk allowing our roads and bridges deteriorate. Generic – AT: But They Don’t Want to PayPublic supports paying for transportation infrastructure.Slone, September 2009 (Sean – Transportation Policy Analyst at the Council of State Governments, Increasing Public Awareness of Infrastructure Costs & Finance, p. http://www.csg.org/knowledgecenter/docs/TIA_infrastructure_cost.pdf) In a study earlier this year commissioned by the HNTB Corporation, a firm that provides architecture, engineering, planning and construction services, 81 percent of Americans surveyed said they agreed that making sacrifices to pay for infrastructure improvements now will make the difference between “a more prosperous or a more difficult future for the next generation.” Sixty-eight percent of respondents said they were willing to pay more in taxes to support highway and bridge maintenance and new construction to reduce traffic congestion. But how much more will Americans pay? The survey said the average American is willing to pay $22 a month to reduce the time spent in traffic by 20 percent. The survey further indicated more Americans trust state government above the federal or city governments and private sector companies to manage and maintain infrastructure projects. Yet 61 percent of respondents said they were not confident taxes they pay to build roads in their area are used well and actually make a difference. 4 Generic – Public TransportationVoters want safer public transportation options.The Rockefeller Foundation 2011 (The Rockefeller Foundation Infrastructure Survey, Conducted by Hart Research Associates and Public Opinion Strategies, p. 3) Voters’ top priorities for additional infrastructure investments are safer streets and having more transportation options. • Voters’ top goal by far is “safer streets for our communities and children”—57% say this should be one of the top-two priorities if more money is invested in infrastructure. This is the top choice for most major subgroups of the electorate. • The second-highest priority for voters overall at 32% is “more transportation options.” But there is a socioeconomic difference here—for voters in lowerincome households the second-highest priority (at 37%) is “less money spent out-of-pocket on transportation.” • In addition, 85% agree that “spending less time in traffic would improve quality of life, make communities safer, and reduce stress in people’s daily lives.” • Moreover, the vast majority also believe the country (80%) and their own community (66%) would benefit from an expanded and improved public transportation system. Latinos 2NCTransportation spending generates Latino support.Politics 365, 3/19/2012 (Don’t Leave Latinos on a Frozen Planet, p. http://politic365.com/2012/03/19/an-economic-recovery-that-doesnt-leave-hispanics-behind/) The GOP austerity plan misses some serious facts regarding the plight of low income communities and belies a serious flaw in message for what their vision of economic recovery for our country should entail. Here are the facts: our economy is slowly recovering, yet for Hispanics and other low income groups including working class Americans, unemployment levels are still high. Getting this segment of our labor force back to work is vital to U.S. economic recovery. Hispanics comprise a large part of the low skilled labor market, making up over 20% of workers in the construction, food industry and farming sectors. Infrastructure investment is an investment in low income communities who have been hit hardest by the recession including Hispanics. The GOP austerity plan, in the long run, would disproportionately affect low income communities who have already been hurt by downturns in the economy. Earlier this year President Obama announced an ambitious $476 billion plan to invest in transportation and infrastructure projects in states over six years. This plan was dead on arrival, mostly due to Republican concerns over cost and calls for austerity. Congress is currently moving a $109 billion transportation bill which would increase infrastructure spending at a less ambitious rate but still with the goal of creating 2 million more jobs in infrastructure spending. While the Senate GOP have been welcome to working on this, the Tea Party wing of the House caucus has roundly derided the approach, calling it egregious overspending. Yet they have not proposed any less costly or more effective alternatives. Their plan does include a new FDA approval process, patent reform, and tax code reform. These are slim pickings for the American worker. While the concept of austerity may provide a romantic notion that if Americans tighten their belts all our troubles would go away, the reality is that Americans have tightened their belts to the point of choking and actions which include job creation and economic growth are still desperately needed. Investment in infrastructure development could be a mechanism to alleviate the unemployment of the hardest hit populations including Hispanics. A recent Senate Hispanic Task Force meeting led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Senator Robert Menendez sought to highlight the importance of legislation that invests in working class Americans as a means to help struggling Hispanics. An investment by the federal government in infrastructure is an investment in the Hispanic community. Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) chairman of the Hispanic Task Force articulated this point: “While we have focused on proposals to help create jobs that would help unemployed Hispanic workers, Republicans have focused only on obstructing our efforts — and Latinos have taken notice. This will have negative impact for them not only in the upcoming elections, but also on their efforts as a whole to reach out to and attract this growing constituency.” The evidence shows recent investments in infrastructure spending spurred job growth for sectors of the labor market which employ Hispanics and others in low income communities. The GOP, in objecting to infrastructure spending to contain costs, is ignoring some key facts. First, low income communities and states desperately need these funds to create jobs and remain solvent. Second, the size of this infrastructure package has already been reduced considerably from what the President asked for. Recent jobs data shows that there have been gains in the economy over the last three months, yet, the reality is that this economy is still fragile. Construction jobs continue to climb, up 2.5% over just three months ago, in a market where Hispanics represent 20% of the labor force. Latinos – Key to ElectionLatino voters will swing over ten states in the election.Barreto, 3/31/2011 (Matt – associate professor of political science at the University of Washington, director of the Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity and Race, Where Latino Votes Will Matter in 2012, Latinovations, p. http://blog.latinovations.com/2011/03/31/guest-blogger-series-matt-barreto-where-latino-votes-will-matter-in-2012/) In 2012, Latino voters have the best chance to influence outcomes in 10 states for either Senate, President, or both. Four of the top five states will be “Latino influence states” on everyone’s map – New Mexico, Florida, Nevada, Colorado all have large and growing Latino electorates in otherwise politically competitive states. In addition to close presidential contests, New Mexico, Florida and Nevada will likely see very competitive Senate elections. Another state we include, Arizona, has a large Latino population, and depending on who the nominees are for U.S. Senate, could have a fairly competitive election with Latino voters proving decisive. In 2010, Latinos registered voters in Arizona demonstrated the highest turnout rate of Latinos in any state. The next batch of states that Latinos may influence are ones that historically are not obvious Latino states, but significant population growth over the last decade has left a substantial Latino eligible voter population. In Connecticut, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Massachusetts, Latinos account for over 5% of potential voters, and each state is expected have a competitive U.S. Senate or Presidential contest in 2012. For example, in Georgia, the Latino population grew by 96% since 2000 while the White population grew by 6%; a state McCain won by just 5% (52-47) in 2008. In Wisconsin Latinos grew by 74% compared to 1% growth for Whites, and could be one of the most fiercely contested states in 2012. Beyond these 10 states, there are others where Latinos will matter if elections are close, as expected in Nebraska, Virginia, Indiana, Missouri and Ohio. While the Latino population is a smaller percentage, the number of Latino citizen adults is growing rapidly, and with voter registration drives targeting potential Latino voters, we could very well be talking about the next “Latino upset” ala Reid vs. Angle in one of these five states. In Missouri the Latino population grew by 79% – 20 times faster than the White population (which grew by 4%), in a state that McCain won by just 4,000 total votes in 2008. One of the biggest keys to Latino influence in 2012 will not just be the population growth which has already occurred, but rather, voter registration drives that still need to occur. Hispanic voters are growing in toss up states --- this will decide the election.Bolton 2012 Alexander Bolton The Hill. “Hispanic population soars in presidential swing states” http://thehill.com/homenews/news/234231-hispanic-population-soars-in-presidential-swing-states Hispanic populations are soaring in toss-up states that will decide the presidential election. Shifting demographics in states not usually associated with Hispanic voters have changed the traditional political calculus heading into Election Day. President Obama and Mitt Romney, the presumed GOP nominee, are aware of the burgeoning Hispanic numbers and have ramped up their outreach in recent days. Immigration, an emotionally charged issue for many Hispanics, is likely to stay on the front burner in the weeks ahead as the Supreme Court is expected to rule soon on the controversial Arizona law requiring law enforcement officers to check the immigration status of people they stop. Hispanic populations have grown by an average of 77 percent in nine presidential battlegrounds since 2000, according to census data. States traditionally seen as dominated by white working-class voters have seen Hispanic populations explode in recent years. Pennsylvania’s Hispanic population grew 83 percent between 2000 and 2010; Iowa’s increased by 83.7 percent; Virginia’s increased 92 percent; North Carolina’s increased by 111 percent; Ohio’s increased by 63 percent; New Hampshire’s increased by 79 percent; and Iowa’s grew by 84 percent, according to U.S. Census data. As a percentage of the total population, these Hispanic voting blocs are not proportionally equal to Nevada or Florida, but they are fast becoming more significant. Clarissa Martinez-De-Castro, director of civic engagement and immigration at the National Council of La Raza, noted that Hispanic voter participation exceeded the margin of Obama’s victory in Indiana and North Carolina, two traditional Republican strongholds, in 2008. In Pennsylvania, Hispanics make up nearly 6 percent of the total population, while in Virginia they account for nearly 8 percent; in North Carolina it’s 8.4 percent; in Iowa, 5 percent; in Ohio, 3.1 percent; and in New Hampshire, nearly 3 percent. “It will have a significant impact in a very close election,” said Manuel Pastor, professor of American Studies and Ethnicity at the University of Southern California. Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.), the Senate Republican’s leading liaison to the Hispanic community, told reporters Thursday that Hispanics in these states would be crucial to Republicans’ fortunes. “What I think we should focus on is the growing number of Hispanic voters in key states like Florida, Virginia, Iowa, North Carolina and others that are much more open-minded, that do not have a longstanding — via geographic — allegiance to one political party or ideology,” he said at a breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. Some analysts think Rubio is a strong contender to become Romney’s running mate because he could attract Hispanic voters, though experts on Hispanic political activity are skeptical. They say many Hispanic voters have been turned off by the harsh anti-immigration rhetoric of the Republican Party and note that Hispanic candidates in Nevada and New Mexico failed to win a majority of Latino voters in 2010. “Nothing is a slam-dunk,” Martinez-De-Castro said of Rubio’s ability to move Hispanic voters if he appears on the GOP ticket. Rubio acknowledged on Thursday that Democrats would win a significant majority of Hispanic voters this fall, regardless of new immigration proposals pushed by Romney or himself. “There is a historical reality that Democrats are in the short term going to do much better among Hispanics,” he said. A June Latino Decisions/Univision poll gave Obama a 43-point lead over Romney among Hispanic voters. Other polls have shown similarly wide margins. Swing states with large Hispanic populations have also seen swift growth between 2000 and 2010, according to the U.S. Census. Nevada’s Hispanic community grew 82 percent, to 26 percent of the state’s population. Its support was a big factor in Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) gritty 2010 reelection. In Colorado, the Hispanic population grew by 41.2 percent to make up 20.7 percent of the total population. Florida’s expanded by 57.4 percent to make up 22.5 percent of the entire state. A survey of U.S. Census data by National Council of La Raza found that the number of registered Hispanic voters in swing states skyrocketed as well. The number of registered Hispanic voters in Pennsylvania swelled from 95,000 in 2004 to 189,000 in 2008. In North Carolina, it rose from 44,000 in 2004 to 83,000 in 2008. In Florida, it grew from 924,000 in 2004 to 1.38 million in 2008. The larger Hispanic populations in Florida, Colorado, Nevada and even Virginia could factor in Romney’s decision to focus on Midwestern states such Ohio, Wisconsin and Michigan, which have proportionally smaller Hispanic blocs. Pastor said increases in Hispanic populations do not always correlate with a proportional rise in the number of registered voters. Population increases include illegal immigrants, who are not allowed to vote, and younger people, who have less consistent voting records. The changing demographics could influence control of the Senate in 2013. Four of the presidential swing states — Nevada, Ohio, Virginia and Florida — are Senate battlegrounds. Romney made a pitch to Hispanic voters Thursday with an address to the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials. Romney told the audience that Obama has been taking their support for granted. He softened his stance on immigration by pledging to give green cards to immigrants who earn advanced degrees at U.S. universities and a path to legal status for those who serve in the military. But he declined to say whether he would uphold the executive order President Obama announced last week halting the deportation of immigrants who came to the country at a young age if they met certain conditions. Obama is scheduled to speak to the Hispanic leadership group Friday. Galvanizing Latino voters will win the election.Huffington Post, 6/12/2012 (Latino 2012: More Potential Latino Voters in 8 States Than Margin of Victory in 2008, p. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/12/latino-2012_n_1591622.html) The Latino vote has been referred to as the "sleeping giant." That's because millions of Latinos are eligible to vote but have not yet registered. If they register and show up to the polls, that awoken giant could determine the 2012 presidential election. In fact, in eight states, the number of potential Latino voters is greater than the margin of victory in the 2008 presidential election, according to an infographic released by the Center for American Progress Tuesday. Latino swing voters will swing six states.Garcia, 2/12/2012(Charles – CEO of Garcia Trujillo, Will Hispanic voters swing the 2012 race?, CNN Opinion, p. http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/10/opinion/garcia-hispanic-voters/index.html) In the 2008 election there was a 30% swing of Hispanic votes away from the Republican Party's share of the vote in 2004. This swing vote was enough to elect Barack Obama to the White House and turn six states — Colorado, Florida, Indiana, New Mexico, Nevada and Virginia — from red to blue. Any candidate or campaign that ignores Hispanic swing voters does it at their peril. Latinos – AT: Immigration KeyLatinos will vote on jobs and economic concerns not immigration.Huffington Post, 7/1/2012 (Latino Vote Coveted in 2012 Election, p. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/01/latino-vote-2012-election_n_1641001.html) Immigration policy would seem to be the natural top issue for these voters, except that nearly two-thirds of Hispanics are born in the U.S. Their priorities are the same as the general population - jobs, the economy, education and health care. "We need to see more jobs here, that's my No. 1 priority and what I want to hear about," says Stefan Gonzalez, an almost 18-year-old from Denver, whose heritage includes Spanish, Mexican and Native American roots. Gonzalez, who works in a suburban Denver pawn shop, says he plans to vote for Obama this fall. In Albuquerque, Ernest Gurule, an 84-year-old whose ancestors settled New Mexico in 1580, says his main issue is the federal health care plan upheld by the Supreme Court last week, and that he'll back Obama in part because of it. Also, the Democrat, adds: "It's too expensive to change horses midstream." Democrats and Republicans are in a fierce race to figure out how to best reach Hispanics. In the short term, these voters could decide the outcome in Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, Florida and elsewhere. The long-term stakes are even bigger because Hispanics are projected to account for roughly 30 percent of the population by 2050, doubling in size and, potentially changing the national political landscape. Latinos – AT: Latinos KeyLatinos voters can only swing a minimal amount of votes.Trende, 6/19/2012 (Sean – Senior Elections Analyst for Real Clear Politics, Obama’s Puzzling Immigration Decision, Real Clear Politics, p. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/06/19/obamas_puzzling_immigration_decision_114531.html) 1) Latinos are underrepresented in swing states. While the Latino vote is frequently portrayed as a critical voting bloc, in truth it is concentrated in only a few swing states with just a handful of electoral votes. The only states where Latinos make up more than 10 percent of the electorate are: Arizona (16 percent of the electorate in 2008), California (18 percent), Colorado (13 percent), Florida (14 percent), Nevada (15 percent), New Mexico (41 percent), and Texas (20 percent). Of these, only Colorado, Florida, and Nevada are swing states; New Mexico and Arizona are at best borderline swing states. In Florida, the Latino vote largely (though decreasingly) comprises voters of Cuban descent and is therefore atypical of other Latino electorates. So in the end, we’re talking about Colorado and Nevada as the states where this is likely to produce dividends of any size, for a total of 15 electoral votes. Hispanics will not affect the election --- the best forecasting models prove.Silver 2012 Nate Silver June 19, 2012. Five Thirty Eight Blog. “Hispanic Voters Less Plentiful in Swing States“ http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/19/hispanic-voters-less-plentiful-in-swing-states/ As I wrote on Tuesday morning, President Obama’s decision to suspend deportations of some young illegal immigrants should entail mostly upside for him from a political standpoint. Based on polls about his decision and the way that Republicans are reacting to it, the evidence that public opinion is on Mr. Obama’s side is reasonably clear. So I don’t agree with other analysts who have termed the decision risky or puzzling. Mr. Obama has learned this year that being the incumbent at a time when most voters think the country is on the wrong track is not necessarily an advantageous position. But an incumbent president can still help himself at the margin with his policy and agenda-setting powers. I do agree with Sean Trende of Real Clear Politics about one key point, however. It is one reason why the caveat “at the margin” very much applies to Mr. Obama’s decision, and may somewhat diminish its electoral importance. As Mr. Trende writes, “Latinos are underrepresented in swing states”. Below is a table showing an estimate of Hispanic turnout in 2008. These figures were determined by multiplying a state’s overall turnout by the share of voters who described themselves as Hispanic or Latino in exit polls. In total, about 11 million Hispanics turned out to vote in 2008, according to these estimates. However, almost 40 percent of the Hispanic vote was in one of just two states – California and Texas – that don’t look to be at all competitive this year. The fact that Democrats are winning clear majorities among Hispanics is one reason that California is no longer competitive, of course. And perhaps Texas will become more competitive in another 8 or 12 or 16 years. (Although note that many Hispanics in Texas have been there for generations and might not be thought of as immigrant communities.) But voters in these states just aren’t likely to sway the Electoral College outcome in 2012. New York and Illinois, which also aren’t at all competitive, and New Jersey, which is only very marginally so, also have a decent number of Hispanic voters. You do see Florida up near the top of the list, however, and Arizona and Colorado not far down, so I will need to be a bit more precise about my analysis to defend my claim. The way that the FiveThirtyEight presidential forecasting model measures the competitiveness of a state is through what it calls the tipping point index. This is a measure of the likelihood that a state will make the marginal difference in the election, giving a candidate the decisive 270th electoral vote. The list of tipping point states is narrower than you might expect. The relative order of the states just doesn’t change very much from election to election, especially when an incumbent is running again and we know what voters thought about him four years earlier. Many states might be competitive, meaning that they might plausibly be won by either candidate, but most of their electoral votes would be superfluous in an election that truly came down to the last vote. The tipping point index accounts both for how close a state is relative to the national trend, and how many electoral votes it has. Right now, the model thinks that the odds are about 50/50 that one of just two states, Virginia and Ohio, will play the tipping point role. Each of these has a below-average number of Hispanic voters. Colorado is third on the tipping point list, and it has an above-average number of Hispanic voters. But Pennsylvania is fourth, and it has a below-average number again. Nevada, with an above-average number of Hispanics, is fifth on the list, but it is followed by three very white-dominated states (Iowa, New Hampshire and Wisconsin). Then comes Florida, which is lower on the list than you might expect, especially since it has 29 electoral votes. The model “thinks” about the different electoral combinations very carefully when it runs its simulations, and considers how the states might move in relationship to one another based on their demographics, as well as in comparison to the national trend. Mr. Obama could certainly win Florida – we give him about a 35 percent chance of doing so — but these simulations find that he usually has easier paths to the victorious 270 electoral votes. The president’s polling and the “fundamentals” factors that the model considers are more favorable to Mr. Obama’s in each of the eight states that appear above Florida on the tipping point list. Most of the time that he wins states like Virginia, Ohio and Colorado, for instance, Mr. Obama will already have a winning map unless he takes some unexpected losses elsewhere. Moreover, many of the Hispanics in Florida are Cuban-Americans, and they do not always behave like the predominantly Mexican-American population of the Southwest, or the Hispanic populations of the Northeast, which include many Puerto Ricans and Dominicans. The model also doesn’t think much of New Mexico as a tipping point state. It really wasn’t close at all in 2008, and polls there have shown Mr. Obama with a double-digit lead at a time when he is barely ahead of Mitt Romney nationally. Mr. Obama could lose New Mexico in a landslide, but it just doesn’t meet the definition of a tipping point state. Even the broader term “swing state” probably mischaracterizes it somewhat. Nor does the model think that Arizona is a tipping point state. If has a fairly large Hispanic population, but the white population there is old and quite conservative. Arizona is something of the opposite of New Mexico – a state Mr. Obama could win this year, but probably only in a landslide where it does not provide the decisive electoral votes. On the whole, if you take a weighted average of the Hispanic turnout in each state based on its tipping point index, it comes out to about 6 percent, less than the 9 percent Hispanic turnout throughout the country as a whole. That means a Hispanic voter is somewhat less likely to swing the Electoral College outcome than if they were evenly distributed (as a share of the population) throughout all 50 states. Latinos – Low TurnoutLatino voter registration is declining rapidly --- high turnout will swing the election.Jaffe 3-29 Michael Jaffe. ABC News and Univision Election Correspndent ABC News“Latinos Could Swing Election, But Turnout Might Disappoint”. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/latinos-could-swing-election-but-turnout-might-disappoint/ Latinos, the nation’s fastest-growing voting bloc, are poised to play a potentially decisive role in this fall’s presidential election, but new data suggests that turnout might fall short of lofty projections, which could change the fate of the race for the White House. The number of registered Latino voters has dropped significantly in recent years, from 11.6 million in 2008 to 10.9 million in 2010, according to new data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey. While 2008 was a presidential election year and 2010 was only a midterm congressional election, that is still a sizable decline, especially given the increase in the Latino population nationwide. In the past decade alone, the Latino population has increased by 43 percent. There are more than 50 million Latinos in this country, nearly one in six Americans. A record 12.2 million Latinos are set to vote in November, a 26 percent increase from 2008, according to projections released in the fall by the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO). But that was before the new Census numbers revealed the surprisingly steep decline in registered Hispanic voters. The William C. Velasquez Institute (WCVI), a non-partisan organization focused on Latinos’ political and economic participation, crunched the Census numbers earlier this month and found that “a significant decline in national Latino voter registration in 2010 may diminish the size of Latino voter turnout in November 2012 by more than a million votes,” according to the organization’s president, Antonio Gonzalez. The off-year decline in Latino voter registration is not unexpected: Registration fell by 4,000 voters after the 2004 presidential election. What is unexpected is that the drop in registration after the 2008 election was far bigger, a fall-off of 626,000 voters, down 5 percent. Nine states “experienced significant declines” in Latino voter registration in 2009-2010, WCVI found: California, Texas, Nevada, Florida, Washington, New Mexico, Michigan, New Jersey and Pennsylvania. Some possible reasons for this decline, the group stated, are “a spike in residential mobility” coupled with “intensive downward economic mobility due to the combined effect of significant (and disproportionate) unemployment and mortgage foreclosures” in these nine states in the past two years. In January, for instance, a survey by the Pew Hispanic Center found that a majority of Latinos believed that the country’s economic downturn had hit their ethnic group harder than other Americans. The Velasquez Institute predicts now that national Latino turnout this fall will be “no higher than 10.5 million votes cast.” While Latino voter turnout might not appear crucial at first glance, it could potentially determine the fate of November’s election, and who occupies the Oval Office for the next four years. Latinos cast 6.6 million votes in 2008 and, with more than two-thirds for President Obama, paving the way for the Illinois Democrat’s resounding win. Generally speaking, Latinos are liberals, tending to disagree with Republicans on key issues such as immigration reform and the government’s role in improving the economy. For Obama, Latino turnout could be the difference between winning and losing the White House. The Obama campaign has made a concerted effort this year to replicate its success among Latinos four years ago. Campaign strategists frequently cite the growing Latino electorate as an advantage and they have taken aim at states with booming Latino populations such as Arizona and Colorado. To that end, the Obama campaign has pounced on some of the inflammatory rhetoric that Republican presidential hopefuls such as Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum have used toward Latinos in the past year’s GOP primary. For instance, after Romney vowed to veto the DREAM Act – the Democrats’ measure to provide a path to citizenship for some children of undocumented immigrants who attend college or serve in the military – praised Arizona’s strict immigration law that ordered immigrants to carry their registration documents at all times and mandated that police question them if there was reason to suspect that they were in the country illegally, and touted the endorsement of the controversial law’s author Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, Obama campaign surrogates dubbed Romney “the most extreme presidential candidate” ever on Latino issues. Thus far, it appears, Chicago’s strategy of ripping Romney’s record with Latinos has worked. A late January poll conducted by Latino Decisions for ABC News and Univision found that 67 percent of Latinos would back Obama in a matchup against Romney, who only earned 25 percent of their support. Forty-one percent of Latinos nationwide said they had a somewhat unfavorable or very unfavorable view of Romney, while a whopping 72 percent of Latinos said the Republican candidates in the primary either didn’t care too much about Latinos or were being outright hostile toward them. But in what might be an alarming sign of lower-than-expected turnout this year, four in 10 Latinos nationwide said they were either not following the GOP primary too closely or not following it at all. In addition, a Pew Hispanic Center study released in December showed that a majority of Latino voters – 56 percent – have not yet engaged in the presidential campaign, saying they have given little or no thought to the candidates in the race. Perhaps wary of that fact, Hispanic groups have kicked off efforts to increase the number of Latino voters come November. The National Council of La Raza has launched a national “Mobilize to Vote” campaign focused on registering and mobilizing thousands of Latinos, especially in critical swing states such as Florida, Nevada and Colorado. The race is a close one in Florida, with Obama leading Romney 49 percent to 42 percent, according to a new Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday. The Latino Decisions poll in January found a similar edge for Obama: 50 percent to 40 percent. But on the economy – the top issue for voters – Romney, who won the state’s January primary, holds the edge on who would do a better job improving the country’s fortunes: 48 percent for the former Massachusetts governor compared with 45 percent for the president, according to the Quinnipiac survey. In battleground states such as Florida, both parties are well aware, Latino voters could swing the election one way or another, but only if they show up to vote. And that, it seems, is a real question at this point. Airports LinksPublic supports airports --- they see it as a job creator.Dye, 3/26/2012 (Morgan – Senior Management of Communications & Marketing at Airports Council International – North America, Poll Finds Americans See Airports’ Value, Centerline, p. http://www.aci-na.org/blog/2012/03/26/poll-finds-americans-see-airports-value/) Americans love their local airports, but they’re still not sure how they work, according to a new national survey commissioned by Airports Council International-North America. A majority (61%) recognized the importance of airports to the economy, with 33% saying they are “extremely important” to their local economy, a finding that is consistent with a recent ACI-NA report that attributed 10.5 million jobs and $1.2 trillion in spending to the nation’s 490 commercial airports. “Americans know that airports are hubs of economic activity and job creation for the communities they support,” Greg Principato, president of ACI-NA, said. Bicycles LinksBicycles are massively popularFederal Highway Administration, 5/7/2012 (Accommodating Bicycle and Pedestrian Travel: A Recommended Approach, p. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/guidance/design_guidance/design.cfm) Bicycling and walking issues have grown in significance throughout the 1990s. As the new millennium dawns public agencies and public interest groups alike are striving to define the most appropriate way in which to accommodate the two modes within the overall transportation system so that those who walk or ride bicycles can safely, conveniently, and comfortably access every destination within a community. Public support and advocacy for improved conditions for bicycling and walking has created a widespread acceptance that more should be done to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of the nonmotorized traveler. Public opinion surveys throughout the 1990s have demonstrated strong support for increased planning, funding and implementation of shared use paths, sidewalks and on-street facilities. Voters will support bicycles --- it’s distinct from other transportation spending.Clark, 4/8/2010 (Andy – President of the League of American Bicyclists, What Role for Polls in Policy Debate?, Transportation Experts Blog at National Journal, p. http://transportation.nationaljournal.com/2010/04/what-role-for-polls-in-funding.php) As others have said quite effectively, people want choice. They don't equate roads and bridges as being exclusively for cars and trucks, especially in metro areas - they want the public right of way and the public realm to build community, to generate activity and jobs, and to facilitate commerce, and they understand that there's a balance to achieving all these goals that isn't always easy. My interpretation of what people will actually vote for - as opposed to what they will say in response to a poll - in recent years is that they will vote to tax themselves for smart transportation investments in building sustainable, livable communites that offer transit, bicycling, walking and driving as options; they will vote for park and recreation bond issues and sales tax initiatives that build critical infrastructure such as parks, trails and open space. The public is much more suspicious of, and less likely to fund, "more of the same" monocultural highway expansion projects that are rooted in a 1950's planning ideology and placed in the hands of heavy-handed state highway agencies with a "trust me we know what's best for you" approach to project selection. High Speed Rail LinksMassive public support for HSRButman, 12/1/2010 (Jim, Survey shows public support for high-speed rail, Biz Times, p. http://www.biztimes.com/article/20101201/ENEWSLETTERS02/312019989/) Nearly two-thirds of American adults (62 percent) said they would definitely or probably use high-speed rail service for leisure or business travel if it were an option, according to a survey from the Washington-based American Public Transportation Association (APTA). The survey, taken among 24,711 adults, also asked how important various factors would be in choosing high-speed rail service. Ninety-one percent of respondents said high-speed rail should offer shorter travel times compared to driving to their destinations; 91 percent said the rail service should be less expensive than flying; 89 percent said it should be less expensive than driving; and 85 percent said the rail service should integrate with local public transit so they could avoid using rental cars and cabs, and paying parking fees. The APTA wants Congress to invest $50 billion over the next six years to build a high-speed rail network. "In most political circles, garnering nearly two-thirds support for a forward-thinking vision like high-speed rail would be considered a landslide," said APTA president William Millar said.. "We strongly support the government's commitment to implementing high-speed rail. It will provide more options for travelers, as well as create jobs and be a strong boost for the local economy." Highways LinksHighways have public support including doubling spending.Dutton, 4/7/2010 (Audrey, Americans Back Expanding Rail, Buses Over Highways, Poll Shows, Bond Buyer, Vol. 372, Issue. 33295, p. Business Source Complete) Americans, even in rural areas, overwhelmingly favor expanding public transportation such as rail or bus transit rather than highway construction, which traditionally has received much more funding, according to a recent national poll. The results should be instructive to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee as it drafts its version of a multi-year bill, argued Transportation for America, a coalition of transportation, housing, environmental, and other groups that commissioned the poll and released its results last week. Transportation for America is pushing for multi-year legislation that would: increase options; create a unified trust fund for rail, freight, highway, transit, and other investments; and give states, regions and cities more direct funding and greater control over project selection, while holding them to a set of measurable goals. The poll of 800 registered voters, conducted in late February and early March, found that most voters supported twice the current levels of federal funding to be spent on public transportation, which can include rail or bus transit partly financed through issuance of municipal bonds. "When thinking about federal funding for public transportation, solid majorities clearly indicate they do not feel that current allocations are appropriate." the polling firms wrote in a memo summarizing the data. Almost 70% of those polled said their community would benefit from expanded public transportation. More than 80% said the whole nation would benefit from it. But only 19% .said they had actually used a bus. ferry, or train during the preceding month, and almost half of those voters who had not used such modes of transportation said they simply have no access to them. Mass Transit LinksMass transit spending has growing public supportWall Street Journal, 11/12/2008 (Mass-Transit Projects Fared Well at Polls, p. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122645311762919469.html) U.S. voters approved billions of dollars for mass-transit projects, highlighting a growing desire to overhaul the nation's aging transportation systems. The increasing political support for transportation investment comes as Democratic leaders in Congress are pushing for a second economic-stimulus bill that could include tens of billions of dollars in additional spending on infrastructure projects. It also signals a potential boon for companies that provide everything from locomotives to collision-avoidance technology. Some 23 initiatives were approved nationwide last week that will inject $75 billion into transportation systems, according to the Center for Transportation Excellence, a nonpartisan research group that promotes mass-transit service. Among the winners: Nearly $10 billion in bonds to start building a high-speed rail network in California, and $18 billion to expand mass-transit service in the Seattle area. The vote on another measure, which would raise the sales tax in Santa Clara County, Calif., to fund an extension of Bay Area Rapid Transit service, remains too close to call. Overall, more than 70% of the major transportation-funding measures on ballots this year were approved, about double the rate at which initiatives are usually passed, the CFTE said. This rate of success came as a surprise to many transportation advocates, who were expecting a less enthusiastic response to tax increases and public debt at a time of economic and fiscal turmoil. Of the measures approved, the CFTE noted, 14 will increase sales taxes, four siphon funds from property taxes and three authorize bonds. "Before the election, we wondered what was going to weigh most on voters...the recent memory of $4 per gallon gas or concerns about the economy," said William Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association. "It was pretty clear people voted for the future. The page has turned on transportation in America." National Infrastructure Banks LinksNIB has substantial public support.The Rockefeller Foundation 2011 (The Rockefeller Foundation Infrastructure Survey, Conducted by Hart Research Associates and Public Opinion Strategies, p. 4) Voters are open to several suggested funding streams for national transportation projects, though there is considerable hesitancy among voters to backing higher taxes to pay for them. • Proposals that the majority of voters find acceptable are encouraging more private investment (78% acceptable) and imposing penalties on projects that go over budget or exceed their deadline (72% acceptable). • There also is significant support for establishing a National Infrastructure Bank (60%), issuing new transportation bonds (59%), and eliminating subsidies for American oil companies that drill in other countries (58%). Sustainable Communities LinksSupport for sustainable communities massive outweighs the opposition.Smart Growth America, March 2011 (Building for the 21st Century: American support for sustainable communities, p. http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/building-for-the-21st-century.pdf) The majority of Americans – regardless of political affiliation – support sustainable communities. The survey found that 79% of Americans overall support the idea of an “urban, suburban, or rural community that has more housing and transportation choices, is closer to jobs, shops or schools, is more energy independent, and helps protect clean air and water.” 76% of Independent voters, 72% of Republicans, 89% of Democrats and 65% of those polled with no party affiliation support this idea. Only 5% of respondents said they opposed this idea. AT: Gas Tax LinkObama will not raise the gas tax for funding.Goozner, 3/21/2012 (Merrill, Paltry Gas Tax drives U.S. Roads into the Ground, The Fiscal Times, p. http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2012/03/21/Paltry-Gas-Tax-Drives-US-Roads-into-the-Ground.aspx) Politics at the Pump The Obama administration has ruled out any increase in the gasoline tax, especially with prices soaring at the pump. “There’s no way before the election that they were going to discuss putting a new revenue source on the table,” said Donna Cooper, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, who previously ran Pennsylvania Gov. Edward Rendell’s policy shop. She recently wrote a report analyzing the nation’s roads and mass transit needs that concluded transportation infrastructure spending needed to double if the U.S. was going to remain competitive. There’s no way that level of funding – or even the current level – is going to come from the gasoline tax. The recovery from the Great Recession has broken a long-term trend that saw gasoline usage rise with economic growth. The sharp downturn of 2008-09 sent daily gasoline consumption plummeting from 9.3 million barrels per day to 9 million barrels a day. That is expected during recessions. People without jobs don’t drive to work, and those with reduced incomes drive less. Congress will not support a gas tax and the plan will just trade off.Klein, 4/13/2012 (Ezra – editor of Wonkblog and a columnist at the Washington Post, The dumb tax pledges that dominate Washington, The Washington Post, p. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-dumb-tax-pledges-that-dominate-washington/2012/04/13/gIQAP7s1ET_blog.html) The consequences of this unhealthy consensus stretch far beyond the budget deficit. Consider, for instance, our roads. We used to have a straightforward way to fund infrastructure in this country: the federal gas tax. In 1956, President Dwight Eisenhower raised the tax from 1.5 cents a gallon to 3 cents to help pay for the creation of the interstate highway system. In 1959, he increased it from 3 cents to 4 cents. In 1982, President Ronald Reagan raised the gas tax to 9 cents. In 1990, President George H.W. Bush raised it to 14 cents, with half of the increase going to reduce the deficit. In 1993, President Bill Clinton raised it to 18.4 cents. In other words, from 1956 to 1993, there was a bipartisan consensus on the federal gasoline tax: Both parties agreed that it occasionally needed to be raised in order to help pay for the nation’s infrastructure. But since 2000, there has been a bipartisan consensus against raising the federal gasoline tax. In 2005, the Bush administration joined with congressional Republicans to support a big transportation bill. But rather than raise the gas tax, the law just exhausted the Highway Trust Fund. In 2009, that law expired. Since then, Republicans and Democrats have failed to pass nine — nine! — short-term extensions, in large part because they can’t agree on how to fund infrastructure. But they do agree on one thing: Neither party intends to raise the gas tax. Directory: files files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2 files -> Integer programming and game theory files -> 4 Integer Programming files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective files -> Pop Warner History files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations Download 1.8 Mb. Share with your friends:
|